tv The Communicators CSPAN April 22, 2013 8:00am-8:31am EDT
fdr certainly was far from perfect when it came to jewish purposes but he was far better than his political opposition or any other world leader at the time. our work also shows, fdr was not monolithic in his response to jewish issues like the extreme works would have us to believe. we actually identified for separate roosevelt's, the first roosevelt of his first term was concerned with reelection, fighting the depression, getting the new deal in, did little or nothing for the jews. ..
>> 937 passengers aboard the u.s. st. louis in june of 1939 were denied entry to cuba, yet it was roosevelt's initiatives that had allowed 5-6,000 jews to reach cuba before they had changed policies with respect to st. wo withed with american jewish relief organizations to find safe havens in western europe for all passengers. this was before the holocaust and before the war. and everyone thought settling them in britain, france, belgium and the netherlands was safe. so the whole story has been badly distorted. he also.
>> top priority which was to prepare the nation for a possible war and immediately sherman tanks to the british to keep the -- there would have been no israel, no jewish state without that. then you have the fourth roosevelt,he naloosevelt who sets up in 1934, a war refugee. personally tries to use diplomacy to get a jewish state in palestine. not perfect, but not monolith imeither. and, you know, ultimately the sad story about the holocaust, it's a worldwide failure.
evil was stronger than the forces of good. evil put a greater priority on the killinews that the forces of good didduring this terrible war of saving the jews. you cannot point your finger at anyone. it is all of us. >> and we've been talking with american university history professor allan lichtman about his most recent book, "fdr and the jews." you're watching booktv on c-span2. >> tina puts money and politics is our biggest threat to equitable representation in our government. what does your research reveal? >> guest: well, she's absolutely right that -- and i think there's widespread agreement on that. in fact, it's one of these things that i think even both parties, parking lots of both parties agree to. i think they'd like to get this
some people would anyway. others make benefit from it. so we did not explore in great detail in this last book what some of the solutions could be. we've talked to people who talked about everythingom cotitutionalamen a ents to limit money in politics and so forth. but before anything can be done, she's absolutely right, something has to be done there. because the amount increases. it seems like the election cycle now is continuous where once it was short. other countries have found ways to restrict that to a shorter time frame which at least would save some money in that sense. >> host: but doesn't that open up more loopholes? >> guest: you mean restricting -- >> host: yeah. if you restricted the time. of wouldn't there be ways around that? >> guest: well, we are very inventive in this country, and there's no doubt about it. folks around the political process -- perhaps the only difference would be we may save a little money.
a lot of people are looking at this, and we couldn't agree more that is the root of the problem. you can't change the tax cold, free trailed, the deregulation issues, you can't change the whole issue of debt financing and all that until we figure out a way to get beyond the influence of the money in politics. >> guest: and this is not easy. and it may not even be possible now that the supreme court has deemed money an exercise of free speech. and that really raises the bar on this. and it just means anything goes from here on out. >> host: v betweens in to you, ge are the people to event and understand the true amount of what the government spends? where is their accessible, understandable data? >> guest: there's really a lot of data out there. i don't think it's a shortage of data. the problem, as always, is a
matter of analyzing it, seeing what's there. i mean, one of the stories out there now that we both found disturbing, there's one whole story out there that social security is in some sort of immediate trouble and that somehow the bookkeeping is not proper. this is totally bogus in our mind. will social security at some point perhaps have to be changed and the retirement age raised? quite possibly. but the fund is not in any danger or in the immediate future. medicare, a different animal. but both of those get lumped together as though they're both the same problem, and they're not. all you have to do is look at even the u.s. budget in brief, and you can see a lot of these issues. that's what's interesting, too, about citizens today. you don't have to go to the library, as much as don and i like libraries, and spend time at libraries. you can do this at your computer free, 24/7, wherever you happen to be. >> host: what's one site you
recommend? where would you spend somebody? >> guest: this is important. i would not settle on a single site. it's pulling together information from multiple sources. >> guest: i mean, there's several. gao is certai one the comptroller of the currency, you know, whoever the president happens to be, you know, those numbers are will. are there. the u.s. budget is online, i think, through numerous sites from the white house. and i suppose being a conspiracy theorist, you'd think they're manipulating the budget. those reports are very voluminous. >> host: you really have to kind of of of learn to -- >> guest: you have to look at, you have to look at. it takes time. there's no shortcuts. it's not exciting work. and people are always saying, asking us have you ever been threatened? we've never been threatened sitting at a library table looking at this kind of data.
but that's what the heart of the work is. it just takes a long time to systematically go through that. but it's open in a way that was much more difficult a few years ago. of. >> host: you're actually, with your questions, putting your finger on what is a really critical problem that goes unmentioned. and that's the news media. and especially now when the news media's really under such pressure, and it's never going to be the same again. it's hard to imagine how this is going to play out. but going back in time, you know, two or three years to the news media that existed over the last 200 years,ing you can lay the blame for much of what has gone on by their failure, by its failure to ask the right questions. >> host: well, allan makes a comment on our facebook with page for you, are there any young journalists that you feel are replicating the kind of in
the-depth reporting that you practice? >> guest: there are a lot of good juniorists out there, and, in fact, we're in the odd situation, there's a national award named after us which is administered by a fat arone university. >> guest: i thought they were supposed to wait until we were dead. [laughter] somebody misjudged, i don't know. >> guest: that's right. but every year some pretty amazing material goes in to the -- they word process. that's just one. don and i individually judge contests from time to time. there's a lot of outstanding work going on in this country, certainly at the regional level and some things also at the national level. is it ever enough and have there been giant breakdowns? and that's true. we have just talked about it, it's an interesting question. we think one of the great breakdowns right now in a lot of the media are in what we would call the beat reporters, ones following a story day in and day
out, week in and week out. because a lot of those ranks have been decimated by cutbacks. so a lot of the broad stuff, some of the things that don and i have done fo years, onill quita ha going and you go back decades in this coun the's actually less o it in some ways than there is now. so we, as long as people have a way, an attitude to get that stuff publishes or viewed, whatever it happens to be, we have a certain amount of confidence that that's, of course, what we're worried about. that's what everybody's worried about. >> >> guest: especially true because most people get their information from television which does not do well with complicated summits. subjects. actually, it doesn't do it at all, so it's kind of irrelevant anymore. but this is a real problem. that's a source of most news for most people.
>> you can watch this and other programs online at booktv.org. >> you've been watching booktv, 48 houf book mmbeginngaturday morning at 8 eastern through monday morning at 8 eastern. nonfiction books all weekend, every weekend right here on c-span2. >> host: this week on "the communicators," a look at cyber attacks and critical infrastructure in the united states. in his state of the union address, president obama said that our enemies are also seeking the ability to sabotage our power grid, our financial institutions, our air traffic control systems. we have representatives this week from all three of those industries. gentlemen, i want to start with an opening question for each of you. what are some of the attacks that have happened on your industry, and how are you preventing them? we'll begin with tom kuhn of the edison electric institute which
represents several electric companies in the united states. >> guest: well, thank you, peter. so far we have, weinged every day onttacks from various sources, but so far the major attacks that we have had have been on customer information systems or things of that nature. they haven't been attacks that keep me up at night which is the ones that would actually do some damage to our critical infrastructure. >> host: how do you work to prevent those? >> guest: how do we work to prevent those? well, you know, we have testimonyings, cyber technologies, prevention technologies. we spend a lot of time now looking at detection technologies. but, again, if we ever got the kind of attack that hurt our critical infrastructure to which the president referred, we also are pretty good on resiliency, redundancy and response and recovery programs like we did with hurricane sandy. peept dumont is president and ceo of the air traffic control
association. mr. dumont, your answer to that question. >> guest: there have been some attacks on the system. ta abt becau it'spublicized and confidential information and, obviously, you don't want too many people to know how the air traffic control system works. it's difficult to explain air traffic control in a sound bite. it's happened up in alaska, and what's being done now is we have very ancient infrastructure for air traffic control. it's been around since late '50s, early '60s, and it's a mix of different equipment. so it's very insecure. right now we're in a modernization phase where we're modernizing, moving from a land-based air traffic control system to space-based; satellites, gps, that type of thing. as we do that, we need to look at how we're going to prevent cyber attacks, how we're going to keep people from getting into the system. so basically right now it's education. it's letting people know what to look for, how to identify threats, what threats look like,
what they might be and what to do when that happens. >> host: greg gar represents the financialrvicestry, former homeland security assistant secretary for cybersecurity. when it comes to banks and financial institutions, mr. garcia, how do you prevent the attacks? what kind of attacks are happening? >> guest: well, you know, the attacks are always evolving, and for the financial services sector most recently we have seen so-called distributed denial of service or ddos attacks which is a way of flooding a network which information requests that cause a slowdown or a stoppage of service. cyber criminals are after money, as was willie sutton back in the days of robbing banks. they're after intellectual property. lots of different types of information. so the attacks and the threats are constantly evolving. the banks are very well prepared
for they a ons of llars in preventive measures, in very high-tech staff who are, have great expertise in this area. i'm representing the financial services information sharing and analysis center, isaf, which is a grouping of banks and financial institutions that gather together their collective intelligence, they share information about threats, attacks and vulnerabilities, and they collectively respond to that. it's all based on the notion that forewarned is forearmed. none of us is as smart as all of us combined. so really the best method of responding to attacks is having advance intelligence, sharing information and working collaboratively. >> host: are there any restrictions on the sharing of information between banks? >> guest: banks have to be careful of about who they share vienn isac and
other industry groupings. certainly, companies don't want to share competitive information that would lead to antitrustish shies. there are -- issues. there are some restrictions bidirectionally between the government, so there has to be a trust relationship improved there. there are some areas where the government cannot, simply cannot share information with the banks, and the financial sector may not share certain information with the government if it runs afoul of privacy concerns, civil liberties, proprietary information, etc. >> host: mr. dumont, has there been an attack on the air traffic control system that has stopped traffic? >> guest: no, absolutely not. but that's something we have to worry about. there are different levels of attacks, and, of course, there
would be different reasons for attacks. is the reason to bring down an aircraft which could be a terrorist type thing which would, as we were discussing in the other room, it's a big catastrophe, and it gets a lot of attention. more importantly, if we cripple the air traffic control system, there's $1.3 trillion to the economy. if you shut that down, you're crippling the economy. me 810 million passengers a year, about 137,000 operations a day. be we shut -- if we shut that down, that's going to be an economic catastrophe. >> host: our guest reporter, gautham nagesh, of cq roll call. >> thank you. you just spoke to the nature of the air traffic control system being quite a bit antiquated. so that brings up two questions. does the fact that it's sort of predigital reduce the risk of a
catastrophic attack by rerouteing a plane, and as you transition to a next generation system, will that increase the risk that is posed by the cyber threat? >> guest: yeah, that's an interesting question. you know, the older systems, you're right, they're less digitized. so the types of threats are different, as you know. as we modernize theysm, we're increasing the aby enter into syste in the old days, before we were worried about cybersecurity and cyber attacks, the faa was considered the air traffic system itself a closed system. nobody could get in. and it was pretty much that way. now as we expand the system, we have more people introducing things into the system, and we modernize the system. for example, as we go to space-based, aircraft are going to become a node on an information system to do collaborative air traffic control, so the controllers aren't doing everything.
they're working with the pilots, the aircraft. the aircraft have a bigger picture of what's going on in the system. as we introduce those into the closed loop, the flight information management system, for example, on the aircraft, that could be a way to get into the system. that could compromise the system. and as we open the back of the airplane up to more people using the internet, then that's a possible entry into the system through the flight management system. hugh duo tesso, a gentleman from germany, was in amsterdam the last three days. he just showed an android app of how he can take over an aircraft going through the automatic dependent surveillance broadcast system, which is satellite-based air traffic control, and the flight management system. it's got some basic commands. go here, that reroutes the aircraft. go down, that crashes the aircraft. and then they have something that's called, they confuse the
pilots. lights go off, things go off, the pilot doesn't understand what's going on. and, again, the big problem is who recognizes that this is going on? so, and easy answer to your question as we digitize we have more entry points into the system. >> so how do you handle that sort of threat where you can control a plane from a smartphone? is this something that you're baking into the systems, and does the fact that the to vary f their age and technology, does that impact the way these things are secured? >> guest: that's an excellent question, absolutely. much older aircraft were less vulnerable because they didn't have the systems that could sewer act on a -- interact on a system wide management, aircraft being part of the network. different fleet aircraft have different capabilities, but thai all getting up to a certain capability which would allow them to operate in the new system.
>> mr. garcia, you mentioned that the financial services industry shares a lot of information right now, and you also discussed the barriers. are any of those barriers preventative to effective threat deterrence? is and is there anything that could be addressed via administrative action? >> guest: well, the banking sector generally supported the so-called cispa information, cyber information sharing protection act, i believe, is the acronym, which enables companies to share more information with the government protected from freedom of information act requests or other public disclosure. that might be the most, the most inhibiting deterrent to information sharing is the prospect that your information can be leaked to the general public and, in fact, putting a target on your forehead for the adversaries who now are better
informed about your vulnerabilities, threats and attacks. where we're trying to push also in addition to information sharing human to human, the financial services sector coordinating council which is sort of the um well la organization -- umbrella organization that the isac is a member o w hve an r&d committee, research and development committee, where we have specified on ten major areas where we see a need for research to fill gaps in our capabilities. and one of those is realtime information sharing machine to machine that takes, that enables us to look at quantities of data, aggregate it, correlate it and enable us to make decisions, predictive decisions about threats and incoming attacks in a realtime way that human-to-human sharing as useful as that is in trust-based
relationship, the human sharing cannot do. so we're also driving a fairly aggressive r&d agenda working with the government, the treasury department, other federal agencies, the academic community to improve our collective knowledge. >> host: tom kuhn, how dependenn network computers and other things that may be vulnerable to cyber attack? >> guest: well, we're very dependent, obviously, and every other industry is dependent upon the electric system. so it is incredibly -- banks or air traffic controllers, whatever, all depend upon the electricity system. so we are putting a tremendous focus on what we need to do on cybersecurity. we are the only industry right now with mandatory standards. five years ago we set up a system with our self-regulating organization that we have called nerc that was set up to respond
to the blackoutsa set of standards with our regulator, the federal energy regulatory commission, and they've been updated five times now. so we have standards, but i think we all degree the standards are kind of a -- agree the standards are kind of a minimum. they don't do the job. what you need to do nd n iormati in y ne the informa t government has. the information has an army of intelligence and people out there that we immediate to partner with. and -- we need to partner with. and we also have an information sharing group that is being expanded right now with ceos and cios and others to work with the department of homeland security and department of energy to make sure that we get realtime information that greg emphasized, actionable intelligence that we need, that we have the best technologies on the system with respect to prevention technologies and also detection technologies. detection technologies are key so that the industry can inform the government and vice versa, and that information sharing
scenario so that we can actually move forward to address threats that may come from terrorist groups or from national groups overseas that may want to harm us. we probably aren't worried as much about a denial of service which is what the banks are experiencing or the exfiltration of data thatpl might u steal corporate espionage or th nature. or the criminal attacks that people want to, you know, attack the banks to try and get some money. we are more worried about, again, the physical damage that would be done to the electric system that would disable the economy and every other part of the economy that depends on electricity. >> host: are there deficiencies in the information sharing abilities? >> guest: well, we are definitely working to improve the information sharing abilities. there is information sharing that is going on right now through, again, through from the government to the industry to the federal regulators and our
federal regulator is greatly expanding under the chairman's leadership. its own capabilities. but it needs to be improved, and it needs to focus on exactly what kind of intelligence we need, actionable intelligence. and this is why we have a very, very high level group working with ceos and cios and others working with the secretaries of the homeland security and the department of energy and the white house, national security agency to make sure that that we improve those information-sharing mechanisms. >> guest: just jump in. information sharing is a very important point, and as tom said rightly, the electric sector, like financial services, communications, information technology, these are the so-called millisecond sectors. services are being delivered in milliseconds. collectively, we and several other major industry sectors
constitute the critical infrastructure of the united states, and while information sharing is something we all know is critical, there are, as tom mentioned, standards of practice that are necessary, and we, the financial sector, is supportive and participating in the president's executive order that was announced in early february, february 12th, to set up a cybersecurity framework collaboratively with industry, with the critical infrastructure sectors. the financial services sector is heavily regulated across many different lines of business for standards of practice. but those are minimum standards of practice. and we recognize every day that we can be doing better, that we need to continually look for the best, the best technology, the best practices, the best people. and if we can use this process to collectively raise the bar across all critical infrastructures, because it's
spotty, it is uneven. financial services, electric sector, other sectors are fairly advanced in how we are attacking the cybersecurity problem. other industry sectors not so much. and we are interconnected, and it's a cliche, but we are only as strong as the ldf can find t everybody to raise that tent and get a stronger, higher level of security that is standards-based but resilient, that is not stagnant, that can, that can, um, evolve with technological innovation and standards of practice, that's kind of what we're looking for now. >> host: mr. dumont, did you want to add something? >> guest: i did. i think we can all agree that information sharing is absolutely essential to get the best practices, to find out the lessons learned, the things that worked, the things that didn't work. but don't you agree there are barriers to information sharing? >> guest: certainly. >> guest: levels of how
classified are you, how much can you know? >> guest: right. >> guest: how much do you want to share about what your cybersecurity measures are, how you're protecting your system. because the more you let out how you're protecting your system, the more absolutely number it becomes. so i think there are some t t we rlly nee get over in our information sharing, and there's certainly not enough information sharing going on. >> host: mr.-- >> guest: i think there's a much greater partnership now with the government than there used to be and much greater attention at the ceo level about how important this is. several years ago the ceos probably didn't know who their chief security officer is. now they're totally connected into them. and with the government, again, we've got this new high-level participation to make sure that we can breakthrough the barriers to information sharing, that we can have clearances occur much quicker. we've had a couple of secret and top secret briefings with our ceos, you know, with the national security agency and homeland security. people understand what the
threats are out there both, you know, individual, terrorist, national, etc. and i think that there's a new urgency going on ishole cybersecurity issue. and i think every industry needs to be proactive because we all are very interdependent, as greg indicates. >> host: gautham nagesh. >> you spoke that the industry has standards, but they are largely minimums. what impact has that had across the energy sector? have those standards helped compel better security practices? >> guest: i don't mean to imply that the standards are minimum, that we're not trying to do good standards. i just think in any kind of standards regime they are the minimum that people are required to do, and then you go beyond that, you need to go beyond that. for example, beyond our standards we've set up threat scenario projects with michael chertoff and his group, the former secretary of homeland security.